Trespassing third parties

[Splash4eva]

My wife suffers from MS, has incontinence, is wheelchair bound, and can't stay in a long line. She is disabled due to her service to this country. In fact she is 100% Total and Permanent with SMC R1 because of the injuries sustained in the Army. For her it is a question of her dignity. She loves Disney and our yearly trips. She looks forward to these indispensable trips. It gives her something to look forward to and brings such hope and joy. Most of her life is bedridden pain. Is Disney really not for her?

God Bless your wife for serving this country!!!! And an early Happy Veterans Day to her as well. We are grateful and thankful for service members like herself!

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Again. Ive stated i know people who have used these 3rd party companies and as we see these parties have been around conducting business. Are you implying Disney was completely oblivious to this or turned a blind eye?

Just because you know people who have used a company like that doesn't mean that Disney knew the names of the specific guides. They can't ban someone if they don't know who they are - and I'm sure they wanted to make sure they were absolutely certain that they had the right people before they banned anyone. It would be a bad look to ban someone for something that they didn't do. So it's not a certainty that the only choices are "oblivious Disney" or "Disney knowingly allowed this for years." Especially when new businesses pop up like cockroaches. There is no evidence to suggest that Disney knew who these specific people were and what they were doing for years and did nothing until now. Unauthorized means unauthorized. Just because they weren't caught sooner doesn't mean that what they were doing was ok.

 

[flynnibus]

I think they get away with it by not guaranteeing accessible seats when you enter the lottery. You are assigned a seat then are offered the opportunity to provide and additional “contribution” that allows you to change seats to a desired section. The accessible section is in the $400 price area.

Like I said - there is more to the story than originally shared. You're talking season tickets and swapping seats. They aren't charging a donation for an accessible ticket specifically - they are charging him for the premium seating area in the stadium for the season ticket holders. It sounds like your friend is buying one class of ticket initially, and then trying to do their accessibility 'exchange' to swap to an accessible seat.

He's not being forced for a 'donation' for an accessible seat - the Stadium offers accessible seating in certain areas, and he's simply not being allowed to side-step the season ticket system by using an accessible seat. The tickets in those areas comes with the price for access to those tickets. Just like every other venue... you pay the price associated with that seat's value. The seats are not required to be the same price as any random seat in the house. You don't get free 'seat upgrades' by trying to purchase an accessible ticket.

Your whole story is predicated on the fact he's winning a lottery for one price tier, and then has to request to be moved to a higher price tier ticket. Even if they offered him to pick the accessible seat up front without the exchange... he'd still be required to pay the price of the area where the accessible seat is. Here, they've just made accessibility an exchange model instead of a 'pick up front'.

Also. I this really has no application to DAS, I just brought it up because it made me think of the one situation in which I have heard of a business charging more for something like this and somehow getting away with it.

Looks like a duck - but not a duck.

 

[lewisc]

I’m not trolling. I’m legitimately pointing out my view which is different. Obviously the guides in the article don’t feel like they were doing anything wrong. If they weren’t abusing DAS then I don’t think they were either.

I have 0 interest in this, I’ve never been a guide, or hired a guide.

I think your points have some validity IF DISNEY was suing the guides, or trying to have them prosecuted for their PAST actions.


The view that Disney can't ban commercial activity, including third party tour guides, is almost like saying the world is flat. You're entitled to have that view BUT....

I've stayed at resorts where tour companies aren't allowed on property, to pick up guests with pre-booked tours, where none of the tour is in resorty property.

The story I remembet, threads years ago third party guides had arrangements with CMs. Recovery FPs, for no reason. Several other unethical actions.

 

[Splash4eva]

Just because you know people who have used a company like that doesn't mean that Disney knew the names of the specific guides. They can't ban someone if they don't know who they are - and I'm sure they wanted to make sure they were absolutely certain that they had the right people before they banned anyone. It would be a bad look to ban someone for something that they didn't do. So it's not a certainty that the only choices are "oblivious Disney" or "Disney knowingly allowed this for years." Especially when new businesses pop up like cockroaches. There is no evidence to suggest that Disney knew who these specific people were and what they were doing for years and did nothing until now. Unauthorized means unauthorized. Just because they weren't caught sooner doesn't mean that what they were doing was ok.

Never said if it was okay or not but ill say this tho. If they truly didnt know. Complete fail on their part….

 

[lazyboy97o]

He's not being forced for a 'donation' for an accessible seat - the Stadium offers accessible seating in certain areas, and he's simply not being allowed to side-step the season ticket system by using an accessible seat. The tickets in those areas comes with the price for access to those tickets. Just like every other venue... you pay the price associated with that seat's value. The seats are not required to be the same price as any random seat in the house. You don't get free 'seat upgrades' by trying to purchase an accessible ticket.

This is not allowed. Seating is supposed to be dispersed. If you don’t have accessible cheap seats then you have to offer at least a portion of the accessible seats at the cheap seat price.

 

[flynnibus]

This is not allowed. Seating is supposed to be dispersed. If you don’t have accessible cheap seats then you have to offer at least a portion of the accessible seats at the cheap seat price.

They do - they offer it in multiple areas of the stadium. The trick here is there is an overlay of the season ticket access. They're paying for the access to a specific area of the stadium as season ticket holders... AS WELL... as getting an accessible ticket.

 

[lewisc]

Your whole story is predicated on the fact he's winning a lottery for one price tier, and then has to request to be moved to a higher price tier ticket. Even if they offered him to pick the accessible seat up front without the exchange... he'd still be required to pay the price of the area where the accessible seat is. Here, they've just made accessibility an exchange model instead of a 'pick up front

We don't have the facts. Accessible sests are supposed to be available in different price points. Is it possible the only accessible seats are on the sideline, ground level? Or only in the bottom section
College sports is known to be creative and flexible in folliwing rules.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

The view that Disney can't ban commercial activity, including third party tour guides, is almost like saying the world is flat. You're entitled to have that view BUT....

Ah yes, I don’t have that view. Disney CAN ban them, just like they could ban Uber drivers and how they did ban multiple scooter rental companies.

My argument is more like… should they ban them, and should they have banned them in the way they did, having them trespassed at the gate.

 

[lazyboy97o]

They do - they offer it in multiple areas of the stadium. The trick here is there is an overlay of the season ticket access. They're paying for the access to a specific area of the stadium as season ticket holders... AS WELL... as getting an accessible ticket.

It doesn’t matter. It’s across the whole venue as well as it’s subdivisions.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Ah yes, I don’t have that view. Disney CAN ban them, just like they could ban Uber drivers and how they did ban multiple scooter rental companies.

My argument is more like… should they ban them, and should they have banned them in the way they did, having them trespassed at the gate.

Do you leave your front door unlocked so anyone can come in and have a place to sleep for the night?

 

[flynnibus]

This is not allowed. Seating is supposed to be dispersed. If you don’t have accessible cheap seats then you have to offer at least a portion of the accessible seats at the cheap seat price.

My guess is there is a reasonable limitation on how many accessible seats (and where) considering it's a grandfathered facility. It's a bowl... so accessible is limited by access.

We don't have the facts. Accessible sests are supposed to be available in different price points.

We do and they do

Wisconsin Athletics Facilities Accessibility Guide

Wisconsin Athletics Facilities Accessibility Guide

uwbadgers.com

Again the complication in the story is not buying tickets - but how they sell certain blocks of season tickets. They aren't letting people use accessibility as a way to sneak into those areas.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Do you leave your front door unlocked so anyone can come in and have a place to sleep for the night?

You’ll have to draw me a map to how those are connected?

 

[lazyboy97o]

You’ll have to draw me a map to how those are connected?

The basic underlying issue you keep denying is unauthorized use of private property. Someone just letting themselves into and using your home does not have your permission, that is what makes it wrong and even a crime. This is a basic rule of our society, you don’t use other peoples things without their permission. But you’re over here telling us that because Johnny has been taking some of Susie’s apple slices all week it’s wrong of Susie to finally tell the teacher on Friday.

 

[flynnibus]

The basic underlying issue you keep denying is unauthorized use of private property. Someone just letting themselves into and using your home does not have your permission, that is what makes it wrong and even a crime. This is a basic rule of our society, you don’t use other peoples things without their permission. But you’re over here telling us that because Johnny has been taking some of Susie’s apple slices all week it’s wrong of Susie to finally tell the teacher on Friday.

... because Trains thinks Johnny SHOULD be able to!

 

[Drdcm]

Like I said - there is more to the story than originally shared. You're talking season tickets and swapping seats. They aren't charging a donation for an accessible ticket specifically - they are charging him for the premium seating area in the stadium for the season ticket holders. It sounds like your friend is buying one class of ticket initially, and then trying to do their accessibility 'exchange' to swap to an accessible seat.

He's not being forced for a 'donation' for an accessible seat - the Stadium offers accessible seating in certain areas, and he's simply not being allowed to side-step the season ticket system by using an accessible seat. The tickets in those areas comes with the price for access to those tickets. Just like every other venue... you pay the price associated with that seat's value. The seats are not required to be the same price as any random seat in the house. You don't get free 'seat upgrades' by trying to purchase an accessible ticket.

Your whole story is predicated on the fact he's winning a lottery for one price tier, and then has to request to be moved to a higher price tier ticket. Even if they offered him to pick the accessible seat up front without the exchange... he'd still be required to pay the price of the area where the accessible seat is. Here, they've just made accessibility an exchange model instead of a 'pick up front'.


Looks like a duck - but not a duck.

Please stop talking to me like I’m a moron. I am an intelligent person and frankly don’t appreciate the condescension. I don’t need you to explain this to me because I already am part of the system and know it better than you do. I go to the games with him and we split the cost. Instead of assuming you know better than me, listen to what I’m saying.

We have already been assigned seats in section E after the lottery. We enter the lottery for category E, we pay if we are selected. We pay thousands of dollars paid up front for section E, not random nose bleed sears. He is then assigned a non-accessible seat via the lottery - in section E. In order to switch to an accessible seat. He pays an additional $400.

For the love of god… I have done this with him for the last 7 years. It is literally the only situation I can think of where they are able to get away with charging more for accessible services. One could argue that the accessible seat is better because it is a literal chair/ removable chair, but is is still an additional cost for the same exact seating section compared to someone who isn’t disabled.

Again, I get that you don’t believe me. I don’t care, I’m trying to do you the courtesy of explaining how the process works. I’m not asking you for feedback on how I’m somehow mistaken due to your incredulity. It’s not believable because it’s a scummy practice that shouldn’t be happening.

 

[Drdcm]

We don't have the facts. Accessible sests are supposed to be available in different price points. Is it possible the only accessible seats are on the sideline, ground level? Or only in the bottom section
College sports is known to be creative and flexible in folliwing rules.

The only accessible seats are first level and 5th level (near concessions). 5th level is the $400 surcharge. There are no lower cost accessible seats.

 

[lewisc]

The only accessible seats are first level and 5th level (near concessions). 5th level is the $400 surcharge. There are no lower cost accessible seats.

Posters, more knowledgeable then me, question the legality of the extra cost. College, "non-profit" maybe it's legal, maybe it falls in the cracks and maybe there isn't a way to challenge it

 

[Drdcm]

Posters, more knowledgeable then me, question the legality of the extra cost. College, "non-profit" maybe it's legal, maybe it falls in the cracks and maybe there isn't a way to challenge it

It’s also called a “recommended contribution” lol. That can’t be a coincidence

 

[lewisc]

It’s also called a “recommended contribution” lol. That can’t be a coincidence

College sports operates under different ethical standards.